OpenZFS 2.3-rc4 Released With Linux 6.12 LTS Support

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Volta
    Senior Member
    • Apr 2019
    • 2270

    #11
    Originally posted by mbod View Post
    You talk about zfs users as "out of tree fanatics"? I would rather call you an "in tree fanatic".
    Everything out of tree is useless trash.

    Comment

    • Volta
      Senior Member
      • Apr 2019
      • 2270

      #12
      Originally posted by ayumu View Post
      Instead, try and get Linux to implement stable API interfaces for filesystems of any license to link against.
      Why? Nobody gives a shit about non tree drivers, filesystems. Stable API is trash.

      Comment

      • Developer12
        Senior Member
        • Dec 2019
        • 1569

        #13
        Originally posted by Chugworth View Post
        The changes that they've made to their data deduplication method sound like they're really polishing a turd. Constantly checking a table for duplicate blocks on every write sounds like a horrendous way to handle it. They should make a deduplication method that can work in the background or on a schedule and use block cloning rather than constantly maintaining some giant deduplication table.
        Not technically possible, due to the lack of BPW.

        Comment

        • Developer12
          Senior Member
          • Dec 2019
          • 1569

          #14
          Originally posted by varikonniemi View Post
          how many days until the next silent data corruption issue? Maybe all out of tree fanatics should stick with something that is in tree and does not suffer from such corruption issues. like bcachefs.
          Hard to think of any filesystems other than ZFS that have had only one data-corrupting bug in 20 years, especially one that required extremely difficult conditions to trigger (both very tightly timed reading/writing to the same file, and it had to have holes, and it only corrupted reads not on-disk data). If there's been another data-corrupting bug in ZFS I'd really like to hear about it, because I don't know of any others in the last 20 years. (except maybe some hypothetical stuff with misuse of encrypted datasets?)

          Comment

          • mbod
            Phoronix Member
            • Aug 2020
            • 63

            #15
            Originally posted by Volta View Post

            Everything out of tree is useless trash.
            Nonsens. Try to get dkms development to be stopped. It’s useless then. No NVIDIA, no VMware, no fpga driver, no special network drivers, etc

            you clearly showed that you have no understanding about Linux business.

            Comment

            • mbod
              Phoronix Member
              • Aug 2020
              • 63

              #16
              Originally posted by ayumu View Post

              Please don't sent people like this to harass ZFS developers.

              Particularly, when this is a license-related problem they can do nothing about.
              This was about deduplication and his ideas to improve it. This is not a license related problem.

              Comment

              • cutterjohn
                Senior Member
                • Mar 2009
                • 329

                #17
                Originally posted by mbod View Post

                "in tree" is not a quality assurance. At least for out of tree you can decide if you want to upgrade your module to the newest version or if not. Sometimes it makes sense not to upgrade and wait to see if bugs in newer module versions pop up. This is not possible with in-tree.

                btrfs (in-tree) had several data corruption bugs in the past. And you can not get around it because it is coming to you automatically with the kernel update. That is really a disaster. Even ext4 (in-tree) had silent data corruption bugs in the past (kernel 6.1.64/6.1.65). debian 12.3 release was delayed due to this.

                bcachefs (in-tree) is so new that it is fair to assume that it will have its own bugs sooner or later.

                You talk about zfs users as "out of tree fanatics"? I would rather call you an "in tree fanatic".
                better yet, just look at how many people, corporations, government, universities, etc. USE openZFS v. the tens that use bcachefs(or even btrfs... which at least has META...)

                ...also the mystery corp that used to fund Kent withdrew it's funding for unknown reasons...

                Best take on openZFS is to listen(or read) Alan Jude's comments on them, the age of the bugs(one was traced back to Sun days and IIRC was only triggered by nvmes... a race condition IIRC which was VERY hard to trigger...), the fixes, etc.

                I am FAR more likely to trust openZFS than bcachefs until it is truly tested and not just a hobby experimental FS... which it is, effectively, right now...

                Comment

                • skeevy420
                  Senior Member
                  • May 2017
                  • 8626

                  #18
                  Originally posted by mbod View Post

                  "in tree" is not a quality assurance. At least for out of tree you can decide if you want to upgrade your module to the newest version or if not. Sometimes it makes sense not to upgrade and wait to see if bugs in newer module versions pop up. This is not possible with in-tree.

                  btrfs (in-tree) had several data corruption bugs in the past. And you can not get around it because it is coming to you automatically with the kernel update. That is really a disaster. Even ext4 (in-tree) had silent data corruption bugs in the past (kernel 6.1.64/6.1.65). debian 12.3 release was delayed due to this.

                  bcachefs (in-tree) is so new that it is fair to assume that it will have its own bugs sooner or later.

                  You talk about zfs users as "out of tree fanatics"? I would rather call you an "in tree fanatic".
                  There's a joke in all of that about the time I updated the kernel which updated BTRFS which just picked up Zstd support so I decided to run "btrfs filesystem defrag -czstd /" and found out the hard way that the GRUB BTRFS driver didn't have Zstd support.

                  Comment

                  • mobadboy
                    Senior Member
                    • Jul 2024
                    • 167

                    #19
                    Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post

                    There's a joke in all of that about the time I updated the kernel which updated BTRFS which just picked up Zstd support so I decided to run "btrfs filesystem defrag -czstd /" and found out the hard way that the GRUB BTRFS driver didn't have Zstd support.
                    That's a feature, not a bug. By using zstd, you're complicit in perpetuating the infinite hate / stupidity machines that are Facebook, Instagram, and the Metaverse. You're helping to provide testing for the most evil company on the planet. I hope you're happy with yourself. You should be ashamed.

                    * this post was made on an install using zstd compression on root​. but dont read this.

                    Comment

                    • skeevy420
                      Senior Member
                      • May 2017
                      • 8626

                      #20
                      Originally posted by mobadboy View Post

                      That's a feature, not a bug.
                      It's the literal reason why I use OpenZFS. That GRUB/BTRFS/Zstd issue was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back regarding me ever using BTRFS outside of trying out different distribution default settings and configurations.

                      By using zstd, you're complicit in perpetuating the infinite hate / stupidity machines that are Facebook, Instagram, and the Metaverse. You're helping to provide testing for the most evil company on the planet. I hope you're happy with yourself. You should be ashamed.

                      * this post was made on an install using zstd compression on root​. but dont read this.
                      Those bastards. EEEing all the CODECS into Zstd so they can steal more data faster and smaller.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X